I don't know how to share videos on here through my phone (which serves as my computer), but I believe the video is titled "The Mysterious Case of Elaine Nix"

I'm not sure, but I believe the symbolism behind water-related deaths is Their way of twisting, or mocking, religious folks and baptism. I could be wrong and am open to other theories. Still, Luciferians and Satanists do love twisting and mocking Abrahamic faiths, so why wouldn't they pervert baptism?

Edited because of stupid autodick

"It's this house that's gone mad! I'm as sane as can be!" ~ICP; Madhouse

Thy Unveiling wrote:I don't know how to share videos on here through my phone (which serves as my computer), but I believe the video is titled "The Mysterious Case of Elaine Nix"

I'm not sure, but I believe the symbolism behind water-related deaths is Their way of twisting, or mocking, religious folks and baptism. I could be wrong and am open to other theories. Still, Luciferians and Satanists do love twisting and mocking Abrahamic faiths, so why wouldn't they pervert baptism?

Edited because of stupid autodick

It could be, though it seems unlikely to me.

A more simple answer seems to me that holding someone under water long enough causes a ''clean'' death..

Okay, my promised contribution. I've always been fascinated by the Lindbergh baby case. Its not an unsolved case but it involved such a colourful cast of characters that would be a relish for any conspiracy researcher (McGowan, where are you when i need you the most!!!????)I don't want to bore you with a long post. The kidnapped baby, later found dead, was the son of famed aviator Charles Lindbergh or Lindy. Alledgedly, the first man to fly solo, non-stop across the Atlantic. His father, Charles Lindbergh sr was a senator who gladly told the world:The trial was rushed and the 'perpetrator' maintained his innocence to the end."Newspaper writer H. L. Mencken called the kidnapping and trial "the biggest story since the Resurrection." Legal scholars havet referred to the trial as one of the "trials of the century".The crime spurred Congress to pass the Federal Kidnapping Act, commonly called the "Lindbergh Law," which made transporting a kidnapping victim across state lines a federal crime." Among the many other interesting characters involved was "Wild Bill" or William Donovan, director of OSS (fore runner of the CIA). And the federal gov't got involved in a local case. To me, the whole thing comes across as a giant conspiracy, to what end, who knows????

I thought the parents staged the kidnapping because they thought the baby had some kind of developmental disability and they didn't want that "shame" in the family. Perhaps I'm confusing it with another case...

"It's this house that's gone mad! I'm as sane as can be!" ~ICP; Madhouse

No, you are right on. Just reading about it over at Wikipedia, alot of things don't add up and i haven't had the opportunity to read books on it. Time has a way of revealing truth. It seems as though they planned to kill their own child (and they succeded) but why? I don't buy the whole developmental disability thing. Lindy's hand was way too deep into the investigation. They could have shipped him to a relative in Sweden (Lindbergh Sr was swedish. He changed his name), Germany or Monaco and the case would have remained an unsolved one but the baby's corpse was found a few miles from their home. Was it the perfect distraction devised for the populace? What was politically going on at that time?

The trial’s injustices — involving the prosecution, judge, and some police officers — suggesta powerful hand at work.Lindbergh was popular, but lacked the wealth and political influence to compromise an entire justice system. Could thekidnapping, and eventualsmearing of Lindbergh asperpetrator, both trace to the Lindberghs’ enemies?In his new book The Lindbergh Baby Kidnap Conspiracy,Professor Alan Marlis, whotaught for 35 years at CityUniversity of New York, believes James P. Warburg was behind the kidnapping. A prominent banker and member of President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s “brain trust,” Warburg is perhaps best remembered for telling a Senate subcommitteein 1950 we would have worldgovernment “by conquest orconsent.” He was the son ofFederal Reserve architect PaulWarburg. Marlis’ book, currently availableonly from the McNally JacksonBookstore in New York City, isclearly a self-publishedmanuscript, but demonstrates extensive research. Marlis describes a context of suddendeaths for enemies of the FDR-Federal Reserve crowd:• Walter Liggett, speechwriter for Lindbergh, Sr., was murdered in 1935 — a case never solved.• In 1936, Louisiana politicianHuey Long, possibly FDR’sbiggest reelection threat, wasassassinated — an incident still controversial. • Louis McFadden, the Fed’schief congressional critic,survived two attempts on hislife before dying suddenly, also in 1936.• After triggering the Great Depression, “establishment”bankers wanted Rooseveltelected as President in 1932 to spawn an era of government borrowing, erosion of the Constitution, and moves toward world government. Lindbergh’sfather-in-law, Dwight Morrow, now Republican Senator for New Jersey, was touted as a possible presidential candidate.In October 1931, Morrow, 58 and fit, attended a charitydinner hosted by LehmanBrothers — heavy backers ofFDR. (Herbert Lehman wasRoosevelt’s Lieutenant Governor in New York and signed the papers extraditing Hauptmann to New Jersey.) After the dinner,Morrow returned home — and died that night. Thus vanished a remaining hope for the Republicans, whom newspapers blamed for the Depression.In 1932, one man still posed athreat to FDR’s election —Charles Lindbergh. Lindy wastoo young constitutionally torun for President, but his popularity was so universal that his active presence alone might have kept Republican hopes alive. But five months after Morrow’s sudden death,Lindbergh’s baby was murdered — effectively removing the grieving father from the political scene. Some of the links.Marlis draws to James Warburg:• The Lindberghs and Warburgs had what Marlis calls a “blood feud.” In 1913, Charles Lindbergh, Sr. tried to stop creation of the Federal Reserve— which Paul Warburg, its firstvice-chairman, had designed. In 1917, Lindbergh tried to have Warburg, as well as FDR’s uncle Frederic Delano, impeached from the Federal Reserve Board.According to Marlis, Lindbergh “Jew-baited” Warburg at theFed chairman hearings; Paul told his son, and the insultwasn’t forgotten.• In 1941, the fathers’ feudcontinued between the sons.James Warburg helped foundand finance the Freedom First Committee to opposeLindbergh’s America FirstCommittee, debated Lindbergh at Madison Square Garden, and publicly denounced him.• Paul Warburg died less than two months before thekidnapping.• The police had suspected the crime was an inside job. The governess in James Warburg’s household was the sister of the Morrows’ seamstress,Marguerite Junge, who knew about the Lindberghs’ change ofplans. Junge’s alibi for thekidnapping night: She was “out riding” with Red Johnsen — boyfriend of the baby’s nurse.• In April 1932 (just after thekidnapping and ransompayment), James Warburg tooka two-month trip to Europe.• Warburg’s estate was in Greenwich, Connecticut — thetown where the very firstLindbergh ransom goldcertificate was passed, by awell-dressed woman at abakery. The cashier, checking the serial-number list,exclaimed it was Lindberghransom money. The womansnatched it back and ran outside into a chauffeured sedan —which police unsuccessfully searched for.Dr. Marlis makes an interesting case, but also seems to draw some unnecessary inferencesfrom coincidences. Warburgordering the kidnapping cannot be proven.